Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Tuesday that he did not meet any more frequently with Shaul Elovitch, owner of Bezeq and Walla and central to Case 4000 than he did with former chief justice Aharon Barak, the thought of now as a major rival.
Approximately a dozen ministers and MKs arrived at the Tel Aviv Regional Court on Tuesday morning in support of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, ahead of the beginning of his testimony in his criminal trial.
Many of the ministers and MKs spoke to media set up outside the courthouse and issued sharp criticism of Israel’s law enforcement and judicial system, accusing them of unfair treatment of Netanyahu amidst an attempt to topple him undemocratically.
The ministers included Transportation Minister Miri Regev (Likud), Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi (Likud), Environment Protection Minister Idit Silman (Likud), Social Equality Minister May Golan (Likud), and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir (Otzma Yehudit), and MKs included Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana (Likud), Coalition Whip Ofir Katz (Likud) Boaz Bismuth (Likud), Avichai Boaron (Likud), Osher Shkalim (Likud), Tally Gotliv (Likud), and Almog Cohen (Otzma Yehudit).
According to Karhi, "Prime Minister Netanyahu arrives today not as a defendant, but as an accuser. We are witnessing the collapse of the cases one by one, even before a single defense witness has taken the stand.”
“With God's help, the truth will come to light and justice will prevail. We will all see how the house of cards built by the prosecution collapses before their eyes, revealing the full truth,” Karhi added.
Karhi also criticized the judge’s decision that Netanyahu will testify three times a week for six hours at a time. He concluded, “Since the investigations began, the people have repeatedly proven at the ballot box that they believe in the Prime Minister and support him, and no persecution or framing of cases will change that."
Regev later wrote on Facebook, "A picture of Prime Minister Netanyahu in court during wartime only serves our enemies. For any citizen, soldier, NCO, or reserve officer, the testimony would be postponed, but not for Prime Minister Netanyahu—this is personal, political persecution against Netanyahu and the entire right-wing. I came this morning with many others to support Netanyahu and send a clear message; we are not intimidated, we are not afraid, and we continue with full force in security and diplomatic efforts."
Other ministers commented from afar. Justice Minister Yariv Levin said in a statement, “It's hard not to feel a deep sense of injustice this morning in light of the ongoing proceedings against Prime Minister Netanyahu and the insistence on holding them precisely during these days when so much rests on his shoulders.”
“Together with many, many citizens of Israel, I wish to strengthen you, Mr. Prime Minister. I know that even today, you will stand tall and present the simple truth as it is,” Levin said.
The prime minister is standing trial for three cases of fraud and breach of trust, and one case of bribery. In the first case, known as Case 1000, he is suspected of providing regulatory and other benefits to billionaire Arnon Milchan, after receiving hundreds of thousands of shekels worth of expensive cigars and champagne, alongside other gifts.
In the second case, known as Case 2000, Netanyahu is suspected of proposing a deal to Yediot Aharonot owner Arnon (Noni) Mozes, whereby he would target Yediot’s main competitor, Israel Hayom, in exchange for positive coverage.
In the third case, known as Case 4000, Netanyahu is suspected of providing Shaul Elovitch, major shareholder of a number of communications and media companies including Bezek, with regulatory benefits in exchange for positive coverage from Walla, which Elovitch also owned. In this case, Netanyahu was indicted for bribery on top of fraud and breach of trust.
Go to the full article >>Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's defense lawyer Amit Hadad on Tuesday told the Jerusalem District Court that the police approach against the prime minister was similar to Russian dictator Joseph Stalin who told his underlings to create crimes to prosecute his opposition figures if they could not find existing crimes.
Netanyahu is the first sitting prime minister to testify in his own public corruption trial in a drama that is expected to take over the country’s narrative for the next month, or months, sidelining what the master messenger wants the national story to be.
His defense lawyer, Amit Hadad, told the Jerusalem District Court that this case started five years ago when the prosecution said there was a connection between the three cases.
“This never happened. Nothing which the prosecution mentioned in its opening was proven. Despite the complete collapse in parts of the indictment,” especially with state’s witness Shlomo Filber and “despite the court's suggestion to the prosecution to drop the bribery charge in Case 4000…we are proud to present Netanyahu's truth and narrative,” said Hadad.
Hadad added that the defense have found more and more on holes in the prosecution case to show the court.
He stated that this shows how lost the prosecution and police were and the absence of limits of the police in pressuring witnesses.
Next, Hadad said that former attorney-general Avichai Mandelblit filed the indictment against Netanyahu on the day which Netanyahu met with then president Donald Trump in 2020.
He claimed that this showed how political the case was.
In real time, it is worth noting that the prosecution had wanted to file the case months before, but that Netanyahu had delayed this with procedural motions regarding alleged immunity.
The defense opened its case around four-and-a-half years after the prosecution opened its case and seven years after the investigations started, with many observers critical that the court has not moved the case along faster to quickly end the divisive episode in the country's history.
The return of his public corruption trial, after essentially a recess since the summer to give Netanyahu and his lawyers more time to prepare, includes Cases 1000 (Illegal Gifts), 2000 (attempted Media Bribery Yediot Aharonot-Yisrael Hayom), and 4000 (Media Bribery Bezeq-Walla.)
Following Hadad bringing out Netanyahu's narrative of the cases involved, he will be cross-examined by a variety of different prosecution lawyers.
Although the prosecution has not said yet who will handle cross-examination, the lead lawyer for all cases has been Deputy State Attorney Liat Ben Ari, the lead lawyer for the largest case, Case 4000, has been Yehudit Tirosh, and the lead lawyer for Cases 1000 and 2000 has been Alon Gildin.
Jerusalem District Court President Judge Rivkah Friedman Feldman – who convicted former prime minister Ehud Olmert of corruption around a decade ago – rejected several Netanyahu postponement requests as well as requests form members of his government after granting his initial request to delay from the summer until December 2, due to the war.
In late November, Friedman Feldman finally gave the prime minister a one-week reprieve bringing the trial up to Tuesday’s main event, but the one week did not really give Netanyahu any relief.
Judges Moshe Baram and Oded Shaham have also presided over the trial along with Friedman-Feldman.
The highlights of the prosecution case from a legal perspective have been the testimony of former Walla CEO Ilan Yeshua; the text messages between Yeshua and former Bezeq and Walla owner Shaul Elovitch, a line of former Walla reporters, former top aides to Netanyahu Nir Hefetz, Shlomo Filber, and Ari Harow, former communications ministry officials, such as former director-general Avi Berger, Hadas Klein, and Arnon Milchin; text messages from former Netanyahu aide Zev Rubinstein, former Netanyahu aide and cousin David Shimron, and a variety of police interrogators, most notably Yoav Telem and Eli Asiag.
Some other political highlights in the case – the drama of which has grabbed the country’s attention now and then – even if their impact on the legal outcome was more minor, included testimony from no less than former prime minister Yair Lapid, former foreign minister Tzipi Livni, sitting Justice Minister Yariv Levin, former Mossad chief Tamir Pardo, and former Israeli ambassador to the United States Gilad Erdan. Former US secretary of state John Kerry only avoided testifying because the US government refused Israel’s request to involve him in the trial.
Of all of these massive numbers of witnesses and developments, the most important witnesses, legally speaking, have been Hefetz and Filber in Case 4000 – both formerly very close to Netanyahu and both of whom received immunity in exchange for pointing the finger at their former boss of many years; and Hadas Klein in Case 1000 – the key witness regarding alleged illegal gifts to Milchin and tycoon James Packer.
Case 1000 is where everything began, and it may be where Netanyahu is in most danger of a conviction, even if the charges are less sensational.
Netanyahu allegedly received NIS 267,254 ($75,800) in cigars and NIS 184,448 ($52,300) worth of champagne from billionaire Milchan between 2011 and 2016. The original indictment said that Sara Netanyahu had allegedly received NIS 10,900 ($3,100) worth of jewelry from him in the same period, although later allegations pushed that number up to over $45,000. Netanyahu and his family also allegedly received another NIS 229,174 ($65,000) in champagne and cigars from Milchan’s associate, Australian billionaire Packer, between 2014 and 2016.
Klein has been the key witness to connect the dots between these former tycoon allies of Netanyahu and the alleged illegal gifts in Case 1000.
Case 4000 was originally the most threatening case with the most serious charge – bribery – but it has faced lots of problems.
In Case 4000, Hefetz assisted the prosecution and remained more solid than expected under cross-examination; while Filber upset the prosecution so much that they declared him a hostile witness, ended his immunity deal, and likely plan to prosecute him in the future.
Hefetz provided the prosecution’s narrative regarding allegations against Netanyahu on the Walla side of the case: that the prime minister used Elovitch and Yeshua to manipulate coverage of him and his political rivals in around 300 instances.
The defense managed to challenge some of the instances and show that Netanyahu’s rivals sometimes also played games manipulating coverage of themselves, but if the court accepts even a majority of the instances, the volume of coverage manipulation by the prime minister would drown out what his rivals have managed to achieve.
Filber was supposed to close the circle by providing the prosecution narrative against Netanyahu on the Bezeq side, namely that he allegedly used his powers over communications policies to benefit Bezeq to the tune of hundreds of millions of shekels – or more.
Given that Elovitch owned both Bezeq and Walla, Netanyahu would have been benefiting Elovitch’s right hand so that Elovitch could essentially benefit Netanyahu with his left hand.
Filber was also supposed to testify that shortly after, on June 7, 2015, he was called to a special meeting with the prime minister, during which the scheme was hatched.
But Filber ended up calling into doubt the date of the meeting, as well as whether Netanyahu’s instructions to him were merely designed to help Elovitch or were also good policy.
If they were also good policy, then much of Case 4000, certainly the most serious and jail-worthy bribery charge, falls apart.
Netanyahu is expected to testify that he was close friends with Milchin and Packer and that any gifts they gave him - no matter how expensive - were in the context of that friendship.
He is also expected to claim that any actions he took in favor of Milchin had nothing to do with the gifts and were the correct policy regarding the issue in question or were rewards for contributions that Milchin made to Israeli national security.
His biggest problem with those claims will be that Klein has testified of instances where both the prime minister and his wife, Sara Netanyahu, made demands to receive gifts, even when their billionaire allies did not seem to want to continue the gift-giving train.
Likewise, Netanyahu will argue in Case 4000 that trying to influence media coverage at Walla to be less biased against oneself is standard for nearly all politicians and that any policy moves made in favor of Bezeq, were the right policies, or that he did not know about all of the actions taken by his subordinates on the issue.
He will have to contend with Hefetz's testimony contradicting his narrative as well as parts of Filber's testimony and others contradicting his narrative.
Case 2000 is the weakest of the cases and is expected to take up less of the time of the prime minister's testimony in court.
The defense case probably will not close before the end of 2025 or even the end of 2026, and the closing arguments and expected appeal will draw the saga out even longer.
Go to the full article >>Starting Tuesday morning, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will begin testifying in his own public corruption trial proceedings– which could take several weeks.
The defense is set to present its case approximately four-and-a-half years after the prosecution began theirs and seven years after the investigations commenced.
The return of Netanyahu's public corruption trial, after a recess since the summer to give the prime minister and his lawyers more time to prepare, includes Cases 1000 (Illegal Gifts), 2000 (attempted Media Bribery – Yediot Aharonot-Israel Hayom), and 4000 (Media Bribery Walla-Bezeq.)
Here is what you need to know about the key characters in the trial:
The first witness to the trial (in April 2021) was former Walla CEO Ilan Yeshua, who helped break open Case 4000, the Walla-Bezeq Affair, for which Netanyahu stands accused of bribery. Yeshua broke open the cases by revealing his text messages with Netanyahu aides and Elovitch.
Netanyahu has two defense lawyers: Boaz Ben Tzur, who represented him in Case 4000 for several years during the prosecution’s presentation of its case, and Amit Hadad, who represented him in Cases 1000/2000 and now represents him in all cases.
Three of the prime minister's former aides will appear as state witnesses.
Shlomo Filber, the former director-general of the Communications Ministry, has at times accused Netanyahu of bribery in Case 4000 after carrying out his illegal orders to favor Bezeq in government policy. However, at other times, he has claimed to have acted independently.
Nir Hefetz also accused Netanyahu of bribery in Case 4000 after carrying out his illegal orders to manage Walla coverage to be more sympathetic to Netanyahu.
Ari Harow will provide background but not direct accusations in Cases 1000 and 2000, having recorded key Netanyahu meetings (by prime minister’s order) in Case 2000. Harow also played a minor role in Case 4000.
Shaul Elovitch, the owner of Walla and Bezeq, who is accused of bribing Netanyahu (Case 4000), and his wife, Iris Elovitch, who is accused of assisting him in the bribery scheme.
Zeev Rubinstein, long-time friend of Netanyahu and Elovitch, who also had business connections with the latter. Rubinstein was a middleman for the Walla part of the media bribery scheme before Hefetz was brought in to take over. Rubinstein lives in the US and did not testify, but his statements to police were filed with the court as evidence, with the agreement of all parties, so they can be used against Netanyahu to try to get a conviction.
Sara Netanyahu – the prime minister’s wife - was a middle person for the Walla part of the Case 4000 media bribery scheme. She allegedly received illegal gifts in Case 1000, but is not indicted as a defendant.
From the Communications Ministry, there are Eitan Tzafrir – the chief of staff – who allegedly aided in Bezeq schemes, and Avi Berger – the director-general – who Netanyahu fired for blocking them.
David Shimron – the cousin and former lawyer/senior adviser to Netanyahu who signed a document years before the trial under oath saying Netanyahu and Elovitch were not close. He later said in court, however, that he did not draft the document, he wasn’t sure who did, and that it was not accurate.
Arnon Nuni Mozes, owner of Yediot Ahronot, who, as part of Case 2000, is accused of attempting to bribe Netanyahu.
Arnon Milchin, (Case 1000) who allegedly gave Netanyahu NIS 462,602 ($130,000) of illegal gifts from 2011-2016. Milchin was questioned in England by video, with judges supervising, which counts as full court testimony.
Hadas Kline, Milchin's aide, who accused Netanyahu of illegalities in Case 1000 and is considered the case's most important witness.
Australian billionaire James Packer, who allegedly gave Netanyahu and his family NIS 229,174 ($64,000) in champagne and cigars between 2014 and 2016 (Case 1000).
Yoav Telem and Eli Asiag
Former prime minister Yair Lapid, former foreign minister Tzipi Livni, sitting Justice Minister Yariv Levin, former Mossad chief Tamir Pardo, and former Israeli ambassador to the United States Gilad Erdan. Former US secretary of state John Kerry did not testify.
Go to the full article >>Today, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will become the first sitting prime minister to testify in his own public corruption trial in a drama that could take over the country’s narrative for the next weeks, sidelining what the master messenger wants the national story to be.
On Tuesday, and for some weeks following, he will be questioned by his defense lawyer, Amit Hadad, as the defense opens its case around four-and-a-half years after the prosecution opened its case and seven years after the investigations started, with many observers critical that the court has not moved the case along faster to more quickly end the divisive episode in the country’s history.
The return of his public corruption trial, after a recess since the summer to give Netanyahu and his lawyers more time to prepare, includes Cases 1000 (Illegal Gifts), 2000 (attempted Media Bribery – Yediot Aharonot-Israel Hayom), and 4000 (Media Bribery Bezeq –Walla.)
Following Hadad’s presentation of Netanyahu’s narrative, he will be cross-examined by several prosecution lawyers.
Although the prosecution has not said yet who will handle cross-examination, the lead lawyer for all cases has been Deputy State Attorney Liat Ben-Ari; the lead lawyer for the largest case, Case 4000, has been Yehudit Tirosh; and the lead lawyer for Cases 1000 and 2000 has been Alon Gildin.
Jerusalem District Court President Judge Rivkah Friedman-Feldman – who convicted former prime minister Ehud Olmert of corruption around a decade ago – rejected three postponement requests by Netanyahu after granting his initial request to delay from the summer until December 2 due to the war.
In late November, Friedman-Feldman finally gave the prime minister a one-week reprieve, bringing the trial up to Tuesday’s main event, but the one week did not really give Netanyahu any relief.
Judges Moshe Baram and Oded Shaham have also presided over the trial along with Friedman-Feldman.
The highlights of the prosecution case from a legal perspective have been the testimony of former Walla CEO Ilan Yeshua; the text messages between Yeshua and former Bezeq and Walla owner Shaul Elovitch; a line of former Walla reporters; former top aides to Netanyahu, Nir Hefetz, Shlomo Filber, and Ari Harow; former communications ministry officials, such as former director-general Avi Berger, Hadas Klein, and Arnon Milchan; text messages from former Netanyahu aide Ze’ev Rubinstein, former Netanyahu aide and cousin David Shimron; and several police interrogators, notably Yoav Telem and Eli Asiag.
Some other political highlights in the case – the drama of which has snatched the country’s attention, even if their impact on the legal outcome was more minor – included testimony from former prime minister Yair Lapid, former foreign minister Tzipi Livni, sitting Justice Minister Yariv Levin, former Mossad chief Tamir Pardo, and former Israeli ambassador to the United Nations Gilad Erdan.
Former US secretary of state John Kerry only avoided testifying because the US government refused Israel’s request to involve him in the trial.
Of all of these massive numbers of witnesses and developments, the most important witnesses, legally speaking, have been Hefetz and Filber in Case 4000 – both formerly very close to Netanyahu and both of whom received immunity in exchange for pointing the finger at their former boss of many years; and Hadas Klein in Case 1000 – the key witness regarding alleged illegal gifts to Milchin and tycoon James Packer.
Case 1000 is where everything began, and it may be where Netanyahu is in most danger of a conviction, even if the charges are less sensational.
Netanyahu allegedly received NIS 267,254 ($75,800) in cigars and NIS 184,448 ($52,300) worth of champagne from billionaire Milchan between 2011 and 2016.
The original indictment said that Sara Netanyahu allegedly received NIS 10,900 ($3,100) worth of jewelry from him in the same period, although new allegations push that number up to over $45,000.
Netanyahu and his family also allegedly received another NIS 229,174 ($65,000) in champagne and cigars from Milchan’s associate, Australian billionaire James Packer, between 2014 and 2016.
Allegedly, as a result of the gifts, Netanyahu sought to help Milchan with visa and tax-related issues.
Klein has been the key witness in connecting the dots between these former tycoon allies of Netanyahu and the alleged illegal gifts in Case 1000.
Case 4000 was originally the most threatening case with the most serious charge – bribery – but it has faced many problems.
In Case 4000, Hefetz assisted the prosecution and remained more solid than expected under cross-examination; Filber upset the prosecution so much that they declared him a hostile witness, terminated his immunity deal, and likely plan to prosecute him in the future.
Hefetz provided the prosecution’s narrative regarding allegations against Netanyahu on the Walla side of the case: The prime minister used Elovitch and Yeshua to manipulate coverage of him and his political rivals in around 300 instances.
The defense managed to challenge some of the instances and show that Netanyahu’s rivals sometimes also played games manipulating coverage of themselves, but if the court accepts even a majority of the instances, the volume of coverage manipulation by the prime minister would drown out what his rivals have managed to achieve.
Filber was supposed to close the circle by providing the prosecution narrative against Netanyahu on the Bezeq side, namely that he allegedly used his powers over communications policies to benefit Bezeq to the tune of hundreds of millions of shekels – or more.
Given that Elovitch owned both Bezeq and Walla, Netanyahu would have been benefiting Elovitch’s right hand so that Elovitch could essentially benefit Netanyahu with his left hand.
Filber was also supposed to testify that shortly after, on June 7, 2015, he was called to a special meeting with the prime minister, during which the scheme was hatched.
But, Filber ended up calling into doubt the date of the meeting, as well as whether Netanyahu’s instructions to him were merely designed to help Elovitch or were also good policy.
If they were also good policy, then much of Case 4000, certainly the most serious and jail-worthy bribery charge, falls apart.
Netanyahu is expected to testify, regarding Case 1000, that he was close friends with Milchan and Packer and that any gifts they gave him – no matter how expensive – were in the context of that friendship.
He is also expected to claim that any actions he took in favor of Milchan had nothing to do with the gifts and were the correct policy regarding the issue in question or rewarded for contributions that Milchan made to Israeli national security.
His biggest problem with those claims will be that Klein has testified of instances where both the prime minister and his wife made demands to receive gifts, even when their billionaire allies did not seem to want to continue the gift-giving train.
Likewise, Netanyahu will argue in Case 4000 that trying to influence media coverage at Walla to be less biased against oneself is standard for nearly all politicians and that any policy moves made in favor of Bezeq were the right policies or that he did not know about all of the actions taken by his subordinates on the issue.
He will have to contend with Hefetz’s testimony contradicting his narrative as well as parts of Filber’s testimony and others contradicting his narrative.
Case 2000 is the weakest of the cases and is expected to take up less of the time of the prime minister’s testimony in court.
The defense case probably will not close before the end of 2025 or even the end of 2026, and the closing arguments and expected appeal will draw the saga out even longer.
Go to the full article >>Perhaps the most polarizing legal saga in Israeli history will take its most dramatic turn today when Defendant No. 1 – Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – takes to the stand to begin defending himself in his criminal trial.
The drama of the first sitting prime minister to testify in a public corruption trial – seven years after the investigations started – is guaranteed to take over the country’s narrative for the foreseeable future.
Defending against allegations of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust, and after years of delays and setbacks – including Sunday when ministers attempted to push back Bibi’s testimony date due to events in Syria – the testimony of Netanyahu is not merely a legal formality; it is a moral necessity, a gesture of accountability, and a demonstration of respect for the very rule of law that forms the bedrock of Israeli democracy.
Almost five years on since he was first indicted, the prime minister’s ongoing legal proceedings have cast a shadow over Israel’s governance, while at the same time illuminating our country’s democratic resilience. Few democracies can claim the ability to hold a sitting or former leader to such stringent judicial scrutiny.
This trial is both a stain and a badge of honor – stark evidence of internal discord but also a testament to a judiciary willing to hold power accountable – a pillar of Israeli society that has been held sacred since the state’s earliest days.
Netanyahu’s testimony should give every citizen trust in Israel’s institutions, proving that no one, not even the nation’s longest-serving prime minister, is above the law.
Despite the constant cries of “witch-hunt” every time an accusation is made against any of the ruling coalition, especially the prime minister, Israeli democracy thrives on its robust judicial framework. While not perfect, it is a system that protects against tyranny and enforces accountability – and one that the government, we should not forget, attempted to overhaul, almost dragging the country into civil unrest before the Hamas attacks of October 7.
Critics may argue that the trial’s timing, coinciding with Israel’s engagement in a multi-front war against Hamas and Hezbollah, as well as regional upheaval, is inappropriate. However, pausing the judicial process would undermine the judiciary’s role as an impartial arbiter of justice. Instead, the country must find a balance – ensuring the trial proceeds fairly while prioritizing the governance and security needs of a nation at war.
While it is imperative that justice be carried out in the name of the law – and the two days Bibi will take the stand should not tear him away from Israel’s security needs for too long – Israelis have far more pressing needs than the daily political soap opera which exists in this country.
Israel has been on the frontlines of existential challenges as it battles Hamas, Hezbollah, and other Iranian proxies, all while monitoring developments in Syria following the sudden fall of the Assad regime. This precarious geopolitical environment of the Middle East demands an unwavering focus from the nation’s leadership.
Netanyahu’s trial risks diverting attention from these pressing matters, as evidenced by recent courtroom tensions and legal wrangling that have dominated headlines. Israel is still a country in trauma. We are still awaiting the return of 100 hostages held by Hamas. We are still battling the brutal terrorist group daily in Gaza and securing our northern border with Lebanon to allow citizens to finally return home.
A resolution of the case is crucial to prevent further erosion of public trust. For Netanyahu, testifying could be his decisive moment to address allegations directly, dispel doubts, and prioritize national stability over personal legal battles – and nobody knows how to take the stage better than Bibi. Israel’s enemies are watching closely, as they were in the months preceding October 7, and any perception of internal disarray could embolden those who seek to exploit it.
For decades, Netanyahu has positioned himself as the guarantor of Israel’s security and prosperity. Now, he must embody the same leadership qualities by transparently confronting the allegations against him. Testifying will not only allow him to present his version of events but also demonstrate a commitment to the democratic values he claims to uphold.
Go to the full article >>National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir arrived in court on Tuesday to watch Prime Minister Netanyahu give testimony in his public corruption trial.
"I came to back the Prime Minister," Ben-Gvir said.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will become the first sitting Israeli prime minister to testify in their own criminal trial when proceedings start at 10:30 a.m. on Tuesday.
Go to the full article >>
